crap, need to find a better SHA256 website or something. My quick googling lead me to crap apparently, because im getting different hashes from different websites. Some remove whitespace or line breaks or something. Anyone got a good one? Overkill. But fun!

My private cryptonight kernal is around 10% faster on windows(windows executable). It can be yours for a 0.2 BTC donation. Then you also get my private spreadcoin miner with sourcecode (linux compatible).. (8.75-10% faster)

Equal to Claymore's probably isn't an easy feat... if you lowered the threshold a bit, you might find some takers.

or increased the bounty? ...

...

#crysx

This works, too.

Personally, I'd be a little more inclined to work on a somewhat easier bounty for somewhat less coin.

Something worth noting, even if you happened to have a equivalent hashrate to Claymore, it still wouldn't be worth mining compared to Neo, Quark, or x11. This is purely for securing the network against botminers unless I'm mistaken. For those of you that care about such things.

Equal to Claymore's probably isn't an easy feat... if you lowered the threshold a bit, you might find some takers.

or increased the bounty? ...

...

#crysx

This works, too.

Personally, I'd be a little more inclined to work on a somewhat easier bounty for somewhat less coin.

Something worth noting, even if you happened to have a equivalent hashrate to Claymore, it still wouldn't be worth mining compared to Neo, Quark, or x11. This is purely for securing the network against botminers unless I'm mistaken. For those of you that care about such things.

But if monero price will rise, open sourced nvidia and amd software (with good performance) will be big plus for miners, which can switch from "Neo, Quark, or x11" to mining monero with its hardware (just compile and run or use compiled version). And it will result in overall network hasrate and monero security. Some miners don't use Proprietary soft for some reasons. I think it's better to have open sourced AMD miner than not to have.

Fresh out of the oven, don't have any performance data beyond personal testing during development with my GTX 750 Ti rig. Does around 200-220 H/s per card for a 750 Ti, both stratum and http protocols supported for pool mining. Haven't actually tested solo. Compiles and runs both on Linux and Windows pretty much straight out of the box. Linux highly recommeded over Windows. Has issues with massive lag if run on a Windows primary GPU, practically renders the computer unusable due to the hashing kernel grabbing the GPU for 1-2 seconds at a time. Pretty much what happens with every other algorithm, this is just orders of magnitude worse. Looking into breaking the kernel into smaller pieces to hopefully alleviate the problem.

tsiv you rock for developing this...

Am I to understand that the miner will bog a 750Ti desktop?

I would have to disagree with you that pretty much every other algo bogs the machine if under Windows with primary GPU, as I mine nonstop with my rig, only has 750Ti and I can do anything in windows with no lag, no slowing of the miner (cudaminer or ccminer). Only exceptions are GPU-intensive apps like 3D gaming.

I don't know if you fixed your problem yet. I have the same setup however in your windows task manager , right click on the ccminer.exe file and wallets to. go to affinity and change from all cpu's to using just one. right click again on ccminer.exe file and select set priority to below normal.

Open source Nvidia mining software that performs better than Tsivs existing software. For the record, here's a screenshot by _sp

Granted, these hashrates are for _sp's modified kernals.

djm34 apparently fiddled with tsivs code a little bit and got these numbers:

260H/s 750ti400H/s 780ti560H/s 980

The 750 ti usually gets 250 h/s without _sp's mod. If anyone has any other hashrates to post for comparison (780ti and 980), please take screenshots.

--- The financials ----

So, as all Monerians should know by now, the Core team has created the forum funding system, which is an attempt to move away from the conventional bounty system. The primary benefit of this system is the developer can set any milestone and timeline for payouts, and then the funders basically agree or disagree based on whether or not they fund something.

djm34 really wants an advance for his work, and this advance is not compatible with the forum funding system. I tried to convince him that a milestone payment for evidence of effort was equivalent to an advance (except that it was held in escrow by fluffypony), but apparently advances are "industry standard".

Advance: "1000 - 1500 xmr"Total: 5000 XMR

So, as it stands, we would have to send 1k - 1.5k xmr to djm for him to start to work on the problem. After completion of the task, he would get the remaining bounty.

If anyone is willing to provide this advance, please post.

He said he could complete the task in 3 weeks, and that he didn't want to make any promises, but thinks he can get the cards on par with the AMD counterpart.

Additional goals (not discussed yet) could be scaleability (the code could work on any future card, at least a maxwell card) and increased usability (getting tsivs to work in linux requires much patience). But these could be pie in the sky for all I know.

I am going to pitch this task for him on the forum funding system, with the "evidence of effort" milestone in place of the advance.

If anyone wants to pony up the advance here, that will work as well.

The rest of the bounty will be done on the forum funding system.

Also, if Wolf0 could chime in here, I think that would really help djm34's case for the advance.

djm34 really wants an advance for his work, and this advance is not compatible with the forum funding system. I tried to convince him that a milestone payment for evidence of effort was equivalent to an advance (except that it was held in escrow by fluffypony), but apparently advances are "industry standard".

I'll admit to be not that familiar with the funding system, but I don't get how an advance would be not compatible. Can't the first milestone just be something like "statement of readiness to start work"?

Of course it is up to funders whether that is acceptable, which is a different matter.